Our house is on fire. Join the resistance: Do no harm/take no shit. My idiosyncratic and confluent bricolage of progressive politics, the collaborative commons, next generation cognitive neuroscience, American pragmatism, de/reconstruction, dynamic systems, embodied realism, postmetaphysics, psychodynamics, aesthetics. It ain't much but it's not nothing.

Thursday, March 14, 2013

Of black holes and spiral staircases

"Objet a is therefore close to the Kantian transcendental
object, since it stands for the unknown x, the noumenal core of the
object beyond appearances, for what...can thus be defined as a pure
parallax object.... More precisely, the object a is the very
CAUSE of the parallax gap, that unfathomable X which forever eludes the
symbolic grasp and thus causes the multiplicity of symbolic
perspectives. The paradox is here a very precise one: it is at the very
point at which a pure difference emerges—a difference which is no longer
a difference between two positively existing objects, but a minimal
difference which divides one and the same object from itself—that this
difference 'as such' immediately coincides with an unfathomable object:
in contrast to a mere difference between objects."

Balder replied: I agree with your reading of the 'a' in Bryant's map; I think it is
intended to represent the excess that is not included in the map. Which
feature I really like about his meta-map, since it puts a black hole
right at the center -- a reminder that would benefit its Integral
cousin's 'theory of everything.'

I said:

In this post
from the previous page I noted Bryant’s levels in the 3 domains. I was
later mistaken that he doesn’t include holarchy per se, but it seems he
is unaware of the finer distinctions as in the MHC, for example. I
think the cross (paradigmatic?) pollination between them would do both
good, but that job is apparently up to us since they don’t appear on
talking terms.

The MHC needs a black hole and onticology needs levels refinement.
The former would change its Platonic assumptions and refine its
postformal levels. The latter would allow for human correlational teleos
and more explicit postformal levels exposition, thereby possibly
opening to the evolutionary advance of P2P socio-economic models like
Rifkin, as but one example. And both would benefit from some form of
contemplative practice, which gives at least some partial 1st-person
access to the withdrawn,* thereby also promoting an interative
observation of the observer up and down (and round and round) the spiral staircase.

“There is much to be said for traditional philosophical reflection
and phenomenological analysis. They can makes us aware of many aspects
of consciousness and, to a limited extent, can enlarge our capacities
for conscious awareness. Phenomenological reflection even allows us to
examine many of the background prereflective structures that lie beneath
our conscious experience. But neither method can adequately explore the
cognitive unconscious—the realm of thought that is completely and
irrevocably inaccessible to direct conscious introspection” (12).

We can get to know our black holes a bit better and admit the limitation.

As to a kennilingual black hole--in stark distinction from the Kennilingam--I at least give him credit for trying to include the notion of the Causal in this thread.
And to those from whom he got it. It too though just needs a postmeta
de/re lubrication per above and it will functionally fit--slip and
slide--quite nicely into said hole of dark and foreboding origin.